Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

They are in a much higher concentration at NYC private schools. That’s why even the T2-T4 will have a higher floor than the publics. All private schools have vetting, which include transcripts, essays, interviews and test scores. People on here like to say that anyone can get into Dwight or Trevor but that’s not actually true. Public schools have to take anyone in the district so you have kids of differing abilities and means. Even in the richer districts there are going to be kids who can’t afford to apply early and need to go where they get the best aid. You’ll see more state schools and community colleges but the at doesn’t mean the kids aren’t smart. I have nephews that went to a very highly rated Bay Area public but ended up at CC after high school because they couldn’t afford to go straight to a UC. This kind of thing doesn’t usually happen at private schools.

I don’t know if all these suburban publics have honors program but a better comparison would be to see how the honors cohort does in exmissions vs private school kids. That is fairer comparison. My guess is it’s similar to non-TT private in places like Millburn and Chatham.

It absolutely isn't true -- even mid tier privates have way better matriculation than wealthy suburban schools, at least in the New York metro area. The other public schools that can offer anywhere near comparable results are public magnet/application schools.

Top 1/3 of Chatham is equivalent to Trevor in exmissions

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

envy?

Very often the case. If your standard family at a highly ranked public was making enough to comfortably afford a 3BR and two tuitions in Manhattan, they’d be doing it. Most got forced out and come here to explain why the suburbs are actually better than the world’s most popular destination.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

So I'm a bit conflicted here. I believe Princeton High School has better exmissions. 20 went to Princeton this year but supposedly only 4 to 5 without family affiliation at the university. 4 to Penn including 2 Wharton, 6 to Cornell and 7 to other Ivies, Duke or UChicago. So call it 37 Ivy+ exmits. I've heard anecdotally that only about 50 to 60 kids in a class of 300 are really gunning for the top colleges. So in this way it felt that getting into a good college would be actually LESS competitive than at a TT. Would be super curious to hear what the PHS alumn posting here has to say.

you are nuts if you think only 60 kids from Princeton high school are shooting for top schools.

Princeton is a top school district.

It’s brutally competitive I have heard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

They are in a much higher concentration at NYC private schools. That’s why even the T2-T4 will have a higher floor than the publics. All private schools have vetting, which include transcripts, essays, interviews and test scores. People on here like to say that anyone can get into Dwight or Trevor but that’s not actually true. Public schools have to take anyone in the district so you have kids of differing abilities and means. Even in the richer districts there are going to be kids who can’t afford to apply early and need to go where they get the best aid. You’ll see more state schools and community colleges but the at doesn’t mean the kids aren’t smart. I have nephews that went to a very highly rated Bay Area public but ended up at CC after high school because they couldn’t afford to go straight to a UC. This kind of thing doesn’t usually happen at private schools.

I don’t know if all these suburban publics have honors program but a better comparison would be to see how the honors cohort does in exmissions vs private school kids. That is fairer comparison. My guess is it’s similar to non-TT private in places like Millburn and Chatham.

It absolutely isn't true -- even mid tier privates have way better matriculation than wealthy suburban schools, at least in the New York metro area. The other public schools that can offer anywhere near comparable results are public magnet/application schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

envy?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

So I'm a bit conflicted here. I believe Princeton High School has better exmissions. 20 went to Princeton this year but supposedly only 4 to 5 without family affiliation at the university. 4 to Penn including 2 Wharton, 6 to Cornell and 7 to other Ivies, Duke or UChicago. So call it 37 Ivy+ exmits. I've heard anecdotally that only about 50 to 60 kids in a class of 300 are really gunning for the top colleges. So in this way it felt that getting into a good college would be actually LESS competitive than at a TT. Would be super curious to hear what the PHS alumn posting here has to say.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

They are in a much higher concentration at NYC private schools. That’s why even the T2-T4 will have a higher floor than the publics. All private schools have vetting, which include transcripts, essays, interviews and test scores. People on here like to say that anyone can get into Dwight or Trevor but that’s not actually true. Public schools have to take anyone in the district so you have kids of differing abilities and means. Even in the richer districts there are going to be kids who can’t afford to apply early and need to go where they get the best aid. You’ll see more state schools and community colleges but the at doesn’t mean the kids aren’t smart. I have nephews that went to a very highly rated Bay Area public but ended up at CC after high school because they couldn’t afford to go straight to a UC. This kind of thing doesn’t usually happen at private schools.

I don’t know if all these suburban publics have honors program but a better comparison would be to see how the honors cohort does in exmissions vs private school kids. That is fairer comparison. My guess is it’s similar to non-TT private in places like Millburn and Chatham.

It absolutely isn't true -- even mid tier privates have way better matriculation than wealthy suburban schools, at least in the New York metro area. The other public schools that can offer anywhere near comparable results are public magnet/application schools.

Right, but that’s only because they have a small, curated class full of parents that don’t need to shop around for the best college deal. I just looked at Chatham’s insta and it seems to me that plenty of kids are getting into pretty good schools and they’re not paying over 70k a year to do it. I would say it’s not so dissimilar to GCS in college exmissions. The floor is lower at the public. If you have more than one kid, and need more space and a good public school, you could do worse. There are some great public schools in the city but it’s such a process to get into them that I can see why someone might choose the suburban public.

Anonymous wrote:Here's a copy of the Princeton High matriculation report.https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1759322845/princetonk12org/afx1ejkusfhdwuozuja5/2025PHSMatriculationReport.pdf
When you account for faculty kids at Princeton, it's pretty underwhelming. The district is a good deal more low income than it use to be my memory is that more than 90 percent of the class went to four year colleges when I was there. The vast majority of kids are going to in state public college which also wasn't the case, the number and quality of private college admissions has fallen off a cliff.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

They are in a much higher concentration at NYC private schools. That’s why even the T2-T4 will have a higher floor than the publics. All private schools have vetting, which include transcripts, essays, interviews and test scores. People on here like to say that anyone can get into Dwight or Trevor but that’s not actually true. Public schools have to take anyone in the district so you have kids of differing abilities and means. Even in the richer districts there are going to be kids who can’t afford to apply early and need to go where they get the best aid. You’ll see more state schools and community colleges but the at doesn’t mean the kids aren’t smart. I have nephews that went to a very highly rated Bay Area public but ended up at CC after high school because they couldn’t afford to go straight to a UC. This kind of thing doesn’t usually happen at private schools.

I don’t know if all these suburban publics have honors program but a better comparison would be to see how the honors cohort does in exmissions vs private school kids. That is fairer comparison. My guess is it’s similar to non-TT private in places like Millburn and Chatham.

It absolutely isn't true -- even mid tier privates have way better matriculation than wealthy suburban schools, at least in the New York metro area. The other public schools that can offer anywhere near comparable results are public magnet/application schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

They are in a much higher concentration at NYC private schools. That’s why even the T2-T4 will have a higher floor than the publics. All private schools have vetting, which include transcripts, essays, interviews and test scores. People on here like to say that anyone can get into Dwight or Trevor but that’s not actually true. Public schools have to take anyone in the district so you have kids of differing abilities and means. Even in the richer districts there are going to be kids who can’t afford to apply early and need to go where they get the best aid. You’ll see more state schools and community colleges but the at doesn’t mean the kids aren’t smart. I have nephews that went to a very highly rated Bay Area public but ended up at CC after high school because they couldn’t afford to go straight to a UC. This kind of thing doesn’t usually happen at private schools.

I don’t know if all these suburban publics have honors program but a better comparison would be to see how the honors cohort does in exmissions vs private school kids. That is fairer comparison. My guess is it’s similar to non-TT private in places like Millburn and Chatham.

It absolutely isn't true -- even mid tier privates have way better matriculation than wealthy suburban schools, at least in the New York metro area. The other public schools that can offer anywhere near comparable results are public magnet/application schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.

They are in a much higher concentration at NYC private schools. That’s why even the T2-T4 will have a higher floor than the publics. All private schools have vetting, which include transcripts, essays, interviews and test scores. People on here like to say that anyone can get into Dwight or Trevor but that’s not actually true. Public schools have to take anyone in the district so you have kids of differing abilities and means. Even in the richer districts there are going to be kids who can’t afford to apply early and need to go where they get the best aid. You’ll see more state schools and community colleges but the at doesn’t mean the kids aren’t smart. I have nephews that went to a very highly rated Bay Area public but ended up at CC after high school because they couldn’t afford to go straight to a UC. This kind of thing doesn’t usually happen at private schools.

I don’t know if all these suburban publics have honors program but a better comparison would be to see how the honors cohort does in exmissions vs private school kids. That is fairer comparison. My guess is it’s similar to non-TT private in places like Millburn and Chatham.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bumping post up. Really want to know what everyone thinks! Does TT really provide a lot of marginal benefit if kids are tracking to top quartile of class academically?

It matters a TON, even at the better suburban schools. For example last year at Chatham NJ - a solid upper middle class town with good school system. It's often ranked in the top 10% of the state.
High property taxes but good schools is the trade off.

Last year class had about 300 graduates. Obviously not everyone is bound for 4 year college, but i think it's like 90%

1 matriculation into cornell, duke, princeton, yale, uChicago - that's it for the top schools. (they did have a vandy, ucla, berkley, georgetown, usc, unc)

so you have to grind hard as kid to get into a top school. and it's not like this is a piece of cake - the parents are professional and all aiming for the same schools.

if the goal is BC, Tuffs, Tulane, Indiana, Middlebury, NYU, Wake Forest - and those are good schools - then that's a different story - although still have to be in top 20% of the class.

College exmissions are MUCH harder in the burbs.

I don’t think it’s that much harder. You’re comparing apples to oranges. NYC TT schools are filled with hooked kids, Chatham PS is not. There’s no guarentee that you’re unhooked kid would have better results. I would be happy if my kid got into any of those colleges.

I don’t know why this argument is always made, as if ivy legacy parents or rich families only have kids in TTs. It’s just not true.